Annie Gilbar Axed At LA Times Magazine

UPDATE: The paper just announced that Nancie Clare was promoted from deputy editor to editor of the Los Angeles Times Magazine. I learned the bomb was dropped this afternoon on experienced editor Annie Gilbar, who made the Los Angeles Times Magazine wonderfully readable and visual and vital to the city again, as well as to Hollywood, something that publication hasn’t been for a long long time. Problem is, there’s no advertising for it no matter if it’s good or not. So now the newpaper’s editor Russ Stanton and publisher Eddy Hartenstein have decided, stupidly, to give back the magazine to editorial. Also fired is the head of production responsible for the incredible look of the magazine, Marc Barrington. “It was a business decision. Annie was making $300,000 a year, Marc $200,000, so that’s half a million which they wanted to save,” an insider tells me. (Yikes, imagine if the newsroom knew salaries like that were being paid!) Now the paper will be edited and produced from inside the LA Times, and it will be crappy all over again.

I have to agree with you on this; the magazine can only go downhill from here. While I did have a few problems with some of the primarily fashion-heavy issues of the LA Times Magazine under Annie Gilbar, I mostly found the new look, feel, and attitude of the magazine to be an entirely positive step in the right direction to enjoying something newsworthy and hip from the LA Times.

Now I have to go back to stealing my neighbor’s NY Times magazine early on Sunday mornings. Which is kinda’ fun, but Ms. Gilbar will still be sorely missed.

Lytton Strachey • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Print isn’t dead yet but printing those huge paychecks is.

Bill • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Let’s be honest — how many people will really about the Los Angeles Times magazine? I’ve never heard anyone talking about it.

michele • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

OMG this is horrible! Annie and her team just published a fantastic Health and Fitness issue and with it they did a fantastic Conversations Speaking Series headlined by Sheryl Crow on Saturday at the new Terrenea Resort. Under Annie’s direction, the magazine really was something to admire, My point here in writing is – ask Annie to take a paycut…but firing her outright. I think it’s more than a business decision.

The LA Times is so lame – – just saying – – did you know that even getting the LA Times Sunday Magazine with your LA Times subscription is “zip code specific?” I live in 90048 – one of the trendiest areas of town…and I haven’t even been getting my issue.

Rey • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Isn’t that ridiculous? I thought the LA Times Mag had prematurely gone away earlier this year but I just found out they didn’t think it was worth slipping them into my Hollywood-90038-ZIPped address.

Why do I keep my subscription again?

John • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

The Conversations Speaking Series you noted was not run or even conceived by Annie or the Magazine. The LA Times Marketing group handled all of it.

really... • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Was this really about budget? After all, this is not a very easy person to work with.

PrioritiesPlease • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Annie G made $300K a year for that gig?! And Marc got $200K?! Seriously?! When the LA TIMES newsroom has been sliced to make meaningful news reporting almost a thing of the past, this seems like one of the sanest decisions in recent times. The magazine was slick and pleasant enough but certainly not a must read. At times, it even read like Annie just wanted to use it to be friends with the shallow fabulous crowd.

Richie • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Annie brought a whole new “readability” to the magazine. We actually looked forward to each new issue. Oh well, I guess we’re just headed back to Dullsville. Sorry Annie – you deserve better.

You’re serious? Arguing that a print publication should be edited by the advertising staff instead of the editorial side? Don’t you normally criticize publications for allowing advertising concerns to dictate their content? Now you want advertising concerns to control this magazine’s content, and think it’s boneheaded that the Times would want to re-establish editorial independence for what should be their marquee Sunday read?

HellofromOjai • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

I never got the magazine with my subscription either…and that $300,000 salary for Gilbar during all the cutbacks in the newsroom is just criminal.

notwarrenbuffett • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

$300,000 and $200,000 plus benefits and expenses! Conde Is closing publications,comps for Neimans are 25% back and the poverty level is at an all time high. Idea maybe they can self publish! Go into the equity markets and raise capital or go borrow $1M against your home. No luck? Unless they got a uncle at Goldman Sachs Los Angeles will just have try to survive without their creative genius.

Former Times Guy • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Half a million seems a bit steep for those two, so I understand the need to trim. That said, there’s no hope for the magazine. Russ is a nice guy, sometimes even an effective advocate for change, and probably the right person to be editing the paper right now considering the never-ending resistance to change throughout the building. But … he’s not big on vision and the personnel moves he’s made don’t show an obvious eye for talent. People continue to fail upward at the place, which more and more resembles a fading liberal arts college, with the old guard holding on and hoping for a White Knight who will bring back the glory days. Good luck, Russ, you’ll need it.

S • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

ugh- annie’s the worst- always has been. the magazine did look good, but bloated salaries, large expense accounts, and kick-backs to her friends have always been annie’s forte. never knew anyone who could stand working for her.

Sally • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Decent newspaper magazine to glance through but not required reading. Hopefully the freed up funds will be redirected and utilized in areas that are more important than the magazine ever was…like the newsroom.

Ted • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Meh. Print is dead. Newspapers are irrelevant. And the LA TIMES, even more so than other papers. Honestly, who even gets it anymore? The only time I see it is on a table needing to be bussed at Starbucks. Discarded. Unwanted. Left behind.

Certainly this isn’t a new observation, but the LA TIMES has never made its POV known. Is it a national paper like the WSJ? A hybrid like the NYT, in that there is local coverage sprinkled throughout? Or a regional paper? One look at how it’s assembled is a great indicator of their lack of focus. It feels like 85 niche-y, micro-sliced, 8-page sections.

Yeah. This gets a huge BFD. I feel bad when passionate, talented folks get the axe for trying to improve a bad product, but in the end, were we really needing the product in the first place?

Amy • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

The best part of the newspaper was reading the magazine after Annie Gilbar took over as editor. I will be canceling my subscription in protest.

Francesca • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Thank God! That Annie Gilbar was editing ANYTHING for the LA Times made the newspaper a laughing stock–and at $300,000 a year! Heartsick. Truly her taste was Home Shopping Network all over again and as for any sense of journalism or ethics…good riddance.

Lessismore • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

AGREED. Gilbar and the “magazine” was an embarrassment to this city. People here do know better.

Sammy • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Wait…there’s an LA Times Magazine?
Is it annual?

ellie • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

This is a real shame. I looked forward to the magazine every month. It was slick, fun, informative, and interesting. Sad times at the times.

Dnero • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

The advertorial product the magazine became was a joke and a slap in a face to those heavy hitting editors and journalists (J.R. Moehringer, Robert Sipchen, John Gliona, Amy Wallace, Claire Hoffman, Lynell George, Oscar Garza, etc.) who put it on the map and made it a rare, West Coast venue for long form journalism.

I especially loathed LA’s contributors’ page, which sketched its characters in black outline over white; color wasn’t needed: Latinos, African-Americans and Asians were rarely seen bylines in a magazine that covers a county where whites are outnumbered by minorities. It smacked of colonialism at worst, sheer ignorance at best. Good riddance indeed

Ashley • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

The LAT magazine was the only thing worth reading in that entire newspaper. Good articles and great design. What your seeing on this page are angry comments from newsroom reporters who will soon be out of a job. Nikki knows better than anyone… the LAT newsroom is a joke. I will miss the magazine — it was great.

KC • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Annie was good at surrounding herself with talented people– that’s it. If you liked the magazine, then yes, be assured that the quality won’t go down with her absence. And if you didn’t like the magazine, then hey, her departure could be seen as a green light for the staff to make something better.

And $300,000? Wow.

Jim Allen • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

surrounding yourself with talented people is exactly what a good editor does. that’s what the position is all about. jeez, lots of LAT haters out there. how empowered the anonymous can become. cowards.

KC • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Surrounding yourself with people is one part of the job. But what about the part where you’re working with them and cultivating their talent? And no, I’m not a “LAT hater.” I’d like to see the magazine do well.

Unfortunate to have worked for... • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Annie is certifiable. Most people she has worked with are no longer on speaking terms with her. A lot of name dropping and rich friends does not a talented editor make.

Happy to have worked for • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

I just saw this -what are you talking about? I worked for Annie more than once over many years– actually, I should say ‘with’, as Annie makes her staff feel as if everyone is collaborating. I would again in a minute. And her always talented staff has followed her many times, so I am puzzled as to what you are talking about. Sounds like you have an ax to grind. The magazine has been a treat to read this last year. I will miss it. Annie, offer me a job any day.

Rs • on Oct 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Trust me. The magazine will thrive and be much better without Annie at the helm. They creative and editorial team are great.